Fri 8.14.09
Still no time for an essay-like post, and we’re going on a much needed mini-break to Laguna Beach this weekend, so here’s something to hold you over — a list of literary magazines that fans of Rattle could also be fans of, at least in my estimation.
Perhaps surprisingly, I’m not all that current with literary magazines; when I first starting working here, the stack of exchange copies was enticing, and I dove in headlong. But in the time since I’ve come to enjoy collections of poetry more than individual poems, and I figure, I have to read so many poets anyway, I might as well keep my pleasure-reading concentrated on the poets I know I’m going to like. So I can’t guarantee that this list is complete, or even be certain that it’s still accurate. These days, the magazines come, and I skim them. They don’t seem to change significantly year-to-year.
So if you like reading Rattle, you might want to check out these magazines, which also publish our brand of poetry — which might be called intelligently accessible:
1. Mid-American Review (website). The editors have good taste, and that’s all that really needs to be said. The poems are always lyrical and imagistic and interesting, but are rarely pretentious. They publish outstanding flash fiction and prose poetry with their Fineline Competition. And their issues are well-designed, with good, vibrant cover art and a classy layout. My praise has nothing to do with the fact that I’ve got two poems in their most recent issue — MAR was one of my favorites way before they published me. The only knock: Even with a recent upgrade, the website is very 1.0, and doesn’t do the print version justice. I mean, they don’t even resize thumbnailed images.
2. Margie (website). It should be no surprise that Margie reads like a thicker, less frequent, version of Rattle – I’ve heard that Robert Nazarene and Rattle’s previous editor, Stellasue Lee, corresponded quite a bit as they learned how to put the two magazines together. A decade later, we still swap poets like partners at Woodstock. I counted 23 poets in their forthcoming issue that we’ve published recently, as well, and I quit in the Ns. So if you can’t get enough of that “intelligently accessible” poetry and can’t wait for our next issue in December, order some Strong Medicine. Extra points for all-poetry. The only knock: The graphic design leaves something to be desired, and despite being more useful than MAR‘s, the website is also very 1.0, complete with scrolling marquee text.
3. Tin House (website). Great writing — including fiction that I actually enjoy — great design, great website. They don’t publish much poetry, relative to fiction, particularly if you go by page-count, and they lean heavily big-name…but the big names who are actually good, and I suspect they have the integrity to say No to the big names who aren’t any good. The only knock: An air of eliticism. They’re the handsome, funny, smart bachelor who never gets the girl because he’s too perfect. There must be something wrong with him, right? He must be a cannibal… I know — publish more than 13 poems in an issue!!!
4. Alehouse (website). Another journal with Rattle-ish poetry, this one younger, just three years old, and published by Jay Rubin out in San Francisco. To be honest, I only read one copy, but that was enough to leave me impressed. Strong work, with a simple, tasteful, playful aesthetic. Extra points for all-poetry. The only knock: Another website that serves only as a submissions funnel. Can I get a few sample poems, at least? (ETA: It’s been brought to my attention that Alehouse only accepts unsolicited submissions through their contest, which means you have to pay to send them work. When I made this post, I was thinking in terms of magazines you might like to read, not really thinking of submissions, but even so, I’m disappointed to hear about that policy. You should never pay to send a magazine your work, even to a contest, unless you really want to enter the contest. There are plenty of magazines who would be happy to read your work for free. If you want to submit work, instead check out Crab Creek Review, which would have been #7 on my list if ordered by the case, and a few commenters have already mentioned.)
5. Barrelhouse (website). I get them confused with Alehouse, but they have absolutely nothing in common. (What’s with all the “houses”?) Barrelhouse is about as edgy as a Rattle reader might want to get — as an editor, I try to keep the old Rattle aesthetic, and my own tastes mostly align, but I really love when poetry goes surreal. So if you enjoyed poems like “Considering the Trebonites” or even better “The Preakness,” you’ll love what Barrelhouse is cooking. The only knock: As with all things edgy, their hipster-irony can get a little tedious at times.
6. Subtropics (website). This magazine is only a few years old, but has a lot in common with Mid-American Review. I don’t know the editors personally, but I know they have good taste. Everything is simple and classy — they know good writing is all you need to blow your hair back, and they find the writing to do it. Paying the poets well probably helps. The only knock: I don’t know… Maybe just that they’re still young, and I don’t trust big coastal universities not to get pretentious.
As I said, the list isn’t by any means extensive, just a summary of what I’ve read and am willing to recommend. Comment if you’re a fan of Rattle, and have other magazines to recommend.
Next week I’ll post the list of lit mags that I envy and respect as an editor, which is a different group entirely.







August 14th, 2009 at 7:36 am
Good list. I was already familiar with 1, 2, 3, and 6, and I’m looking forward to checking into the other two. I also like the New York Quarterly. (It is devoted exclusively to poetry.) Pleiades is another good one. I especially like their reviews.
August 14th, 2009 at 9:00 am
NYQ is on my forthcoming respect list. Pleiades is one I’ve never read, but should check out, thanks.
August 14th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Hi, Tim,
A good list. I also really like Redivider, FIELD, AGNI and New England Review. Peter
August 14th, 2009 at 11:51 am
Good list!
Two more I’d recommend for fans of Rattle? American Poetry Journal and Redactions. I’ll probably think of more – Evansville Review maybe?
August 14th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Hey, I’m in that issue of Alehouse, too!
Will definitely check out the others. One I would also recommend as intelligently accessible is Crab Creek Review. I’ve only read one issue (the current one), but it was a knockout.
August 15th, 2009 at 10:56 am
I love Tin House.
August 15th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
[Comment removed. Belligerence will not be tolerated. This is your last warning; do it again and your IP will be banned.]
August 15th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Nothing worse than an ass who can’t spell…
August 16th, 2009 at 9:02 am
I second Crab Creek Review! (Thanks Laurie!)
August 16th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
I looked at the Alehouse website. It appears that they accept only contest entries. Which means, basically, that they charge reading fees. I think this is a horrible practice and I would never submit my work to a magazine which charges reading fees. I see that they are also not listed at Doutrope’s, probably because of their contest-only policy.
August 16th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Thanks for pointing that out, Cafais, I hadn’t noticed — I’ve only seen that one copy, which I read cover-to-cover and enjoyed, but I’ve never looked at submissions or how they run. I can’t get behind a magazine that has that policy, that’s definitely not cool.
August 16th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Oh, and I thought about both Cranky and CCR, but I’d decided to make a list of 6, and thought I should avoid too many mags I’ve been in.
August 17th, 2009 at 5:33 am
Tim, I think Cranky is defunct.
August 17th, 2009 at 6:45 am
I think the Indiana Review and Rattle have a lot in common in terms of general awesomeness.
August 19th, 2009 at 9:20 am
“Nothing worse than an ass who can’t spell”. That’s so true. I can’t think of anything that would be worse. Honestly, in all possible scenarios that’s about as bad as it gets. Really. Horrible, just horrible. I’m so glad I didn’t have to be subjected to it.
August 19th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Great List. I also agree with Crab Creek Review, and for somewhat more gritty, but always accessible and inspiring poetry, Nerve Cowboy (website) http://www.jwhagins.com/nervecowboy.html and Slipstream.
August 25th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Well, he said something mean about me and directed it right to me just because I said I liked Tin House. But he spelled his insult wrong.
I guess really the only thing worse than an ass who can’t spell is an ass who is sarcastic. But other than that, I can’t think of anything worse.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:47 am
That meanie! And right to your face, too? He should have done it behind your back! Didn’t you misspell “kernel” not too long ago?
August 26th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
What are you, his agent? Get over it.
August 26th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
And don’t bother saying anything else to me or about me Mather. It will be completely wasted. I’m not going to visit this blog anymore. Too many jerks.
August 27th, 2009 at 10:13 am
Well, this stuff sounds like happy-face high school 101! I best put on my self-censorship cap, in a sincere effort not to end up like David Ochs… right into the Yellow Happy-Face Censorship Dumpster. My fear is that Tim, Sandee, and so many others just don’t get it… they just don’t get democracy. How ever did they manage to get through the school system in America with such little respect for democracy? That needs to be examined… and I don’t blame you Tim or Sandee… I blame those teachers you probably happy-face praise. As more and more citizens choose to adorn the yellow happy face, the less and less democracy we shall have in America. Constant praise of banality and lack of originality, as in the established-order- friendly mags you mention Tim, also helps to lead us in that sad direction. Evidently, you and Sandee will not be able to understand anything I’ve written here. So, CENSOR HIM! CENSOR HIM! CENSOR HIM! bellow your acolytes, as if seated in the arena of some ancient Roman colliseum. It is as if you’re running a mag out of the Vatican in the 1500s!
G. Tod Slone, Ed.
http://www.theamericandissident.org
August 27th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Tod, We’ve agreed before, but I disagree that the magazines on this list are banal. I actually do not care for about 75% of the poetry I read. I will not mention them by name, but I’ve read entire poetry journals without really liking a single poem. (Basically, I consider myself a tough critic.) I’ve read recent editions of Margie and Mid-American Review. I actually liked MOST of the poems in each one. I found them to be innovative, accessible, and meaningful. I agree that there is much to criticize in modern poetry, but I would try to be a little more open-minded to journals that publish quality work, rather than broadly condemn the field. (I would include Rattle and the New York Quartly, among others, in the list of journals that published a large amount of quality work.)
August 27th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
Now, Tim, since Doug Lederman, editor of Inside Higher Ed just complimented me today, noting I’m good at giving lectures (“Thanks for the lecture — you’re good at that.”), I’ll give you one. Actually, Lederman’s compliment regarded his censoring one of my comments on outlandish fear of libel. So, I taught him what libel inferred in the legal sense. Anyhow, you note RE MAR, “The editors have good taste, and that’s all that really needs to be said.” That is a shockingly naive and frighteningly vacuous statement! Come on, Tim. Can’t you do better than that? Now, how can we possibly make you understand that “good taste” is subjective and is normally thinly veiled code for “bourgeois taste,” which of course tends to be anti-democratic and pro-oligarchic (as in Teddy K).
For each of your many laudatory comments, you should include at least a few lines of poetry to support them. Otherwise, your comments become unsupported happy-face hot air. For an example of backing up comments (did not any of your college professors insist regarding this point?), see http://www.theamericandissident.org/Reviews-BestAmericanPoetry2007.htm, which was published in Left Cheek.
“Intelligently accessible poetry”! Now, that’s a good one. But what the hell does it mean? Again, support the comment with several “intelligently accessible” pieces of verse… then we’ll know what it means… instead of opening wide and ingurgitating a la Sandee. Again, I would be surprised if it’s not just another code phrase for bourgeois and disengaged.
“And I suspect they have the integrity to say No to the big names who aren’t any good,” you note regarding Tin. But don’t you get it? Because they have Big Names, they are automatically good. If you have a Big Name, you cannot produce something not good. That’s how it works in the established order! I’m surprised you didn’t know that.
“Another journal with Rattle-ish poetry,” you note RE Alehouse. Wow. What ever does that mean? Does it inherently mean GREAT? In any case, I’m hardly surpised at all you’d pick Alehous because its editor reminds me so very much of you. He too wears those very dark PC glasses. You can take a look at the lengthy brick-wall conversation I had with the dude right here: http://www.theamericandissident.org/AlehousePress.htm. Check out the toon I did on him as Super Civility Man!
As for Barrelhouse, it’s “edgy,” you state. But what does that amazingly hackneyed term really mean? Again, it likely serves as yet another code for bourgeois and disengaged.
“Everything is simple and classy,” you note regarding Subtropics. Ditto. Honestly, Tim, if these are reviews, you need to go back to some MFA program (definitely not the one you graduated from!) and take some courses in reviewing. THE KEY: ALWAYS CITE PRECISE EXAMPLES WITH YOUR EPITHETS!
This lecture is copywright, Professor G. Tod Slone aka The Unemployed Professor.
August 27th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Again, Caf, we get into this seeming objective idea of “quality work.” I find the term reprehensible for that reason.
August 27th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Now, Tim, since Doug Lederman, editor of Inside Higher Ed just complimented me today, noting I’m good at giving lectures (“Thanks for the lecture — you’re good at that.”), I’ll give you one. Actually, Lederman’s compliment regarded his censoring one of my comments on outlandish fear of libel. So, I taught him what libel inferred in the legal sense. Anyhow, you note RE MAR, “The editors have good taste, and that’s all that really needs to be said.” That is a shockingly naive and frighteningly vacuous statement! Come on, Tim. Can’t you do better than that? Now, how can we possibly make you understand that “good taste” is subjective and is normally thinly veiled code for “bourgeois taste,” which of course tends to be anti-democratic and pro-oligarchic (as in Teddy K).
For each of your many laudatory comments, you should include at least a few lines of poetry to support them. Otherwise, your comments become unsupported happy-face hot air. For an example of backing up comments (did not any of your college professors insist regarding this point?), see http://www.theamericandissident.org/Reviews-BestAmericanPoetry2007.htm, which was published in Left Cheek.
“Intelligently accessible poetry”! Now, that’s a good one. But what the hell does it mean? Again, support the comment with several “intelligently accessible” pieces of verse… then we’ll know what it means… instead of opening wide and ingurgitating a la Sandee. Again, I would be surprised if it’s not just another code phrase for bourgeois and disengaged.
“And I suspect they have the integrity to say No to the big names who aren’t any good,” you note regarding Tin. But don’t you get it? Because they have Big Names, they are automatically good. If you have a Big Name, you cannot produce something not good. That’s how it works in the established order! I’m surprised you didn’t know that.
August 27th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
“Another journal with Rattle-ish poetry,” you note RE Alehouse. Wow. What ever does that mean? Does it inherently mean GREAT? In any case, I’m hardly surprised at all you’d pick Alehouse because its editor reminds me so very much of you. He too wears those very dark PC glasses. You can take a look at the lengthy brick-wall conversation I had with the dude right here: http://www.theamericandissident.org/AlehousePress.htm. Check out the toon I did on him as Super Civility Man!
As for Barrelhouse, it’s “edgy,” you state. But what does that amazingly hackneyed term really mean? Again, it likely serves as yet another code for bourgeois and disengaged.
“Everything is simple and classy,” you note regarding Subtropics. Ditto. Honestly, Tim, if these are reviews, you need to go back to some MFA program (definitely not the one you graduated from!) and take some courses in reviewing. THE KEY: ALWAYS CITE PRECISE EXAMPLES WITH YOUR EPITHETS!
This lecture is copyright, Professor G. Tod Slone aka The Unemployed Professor.
August 27th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Sorry for the doubling up of my entry, but I’d tried posting it much earlier today, noticed it wasn’t posted, tried again, noticed it wasn’t posted, then tried half and that worked, then the second half. Amen
August 29th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Ok, Tod, I will concede that “quality” is ultimately a subjective term as are all artistic judgments. But where does that leave us? I still have a right to make artistic judgments as do you, Tim, and everyone else. Of course, the background of the judge, as well as the defense of their judgment, gives each judgment its own weight. Therefore, I can say that magazine “A” publishes more quality work than magazine “B”. If I want to defend that judgment, I can. Otherwise, I can just give my opinion and leave it at that. I know you think everything is “bourgeios” (a word I hardly ever use – - I try not to critique the preferences of other people) and “disengaged”. Usually that is correct. (Remember Sturgeon’s Law?) However, let me ask plainly: Are there any journals, besides your own, that you actually like?
August 30th, 2009 at 6:40 am
Cafais,
Thanks for responding. It looks as if my words on Tim’s piece simply hit a brick wall. Well, at least Tim didn’t kill the debate by keeping others from posting. You agree with me that “quality” is inevitably a subjective term, then state “But where does that leave us?” Clearly, it leaves us where we are now with the bulk of professors and students, more or less, clearly defining “quality” as bourgeois good taste. What irritates me is when somebody will mention a famous name and expect me to automatically agree on that particular “quality” issue, though w/o even asking for my opinion. In other words, famous name for most = quality… for most who have not learned to question and challenge and otherwise think for themselves. Most, if not all, famous living poets are living the easy life, many as job-secure, well-paid academics. What kind of poetry might that produce? Well, it produces the stuff published in most of the high-brow mags. Lots of verbosity, bourgeois cleverness, and not much of anything else.
I think if you took a little time to read my 2007 review of the purported BEST poetry of that year you’d understand better, that is, if you’re still open minded to the issue. Just examine the many examples I cite regarding what the established order deemed to be BEST “quality” that year (http://www.theamericandissident.org/Reviews-BestAmericanPoetry2007.htm). Please, take a look at those examples!
Of course, you and Tim have a right to judge. We all should have that right. And when our judgment differs from that of the established order we should not be knee-jerk dismissed as assholes or whatever the term of choice might be for apostates.
The defense of judgment via LOGICAL argumentation and supporting examples is key, NOT the judge’s background, as you stipulate.
I like a journal called Counterpoise, which doesn’t publish poetry. So, you’re right to imply that I don’t like much of what is out there at all. I really cannot tell the difference of poetry published from one high-brow mag to the next. In other words, the mags really do tend to be poetry for the sake of poetry and nothing else. And of course that is their right. As a citizen, what pisses me off is the NEA and other cultural councils will not open their mind to alternative possibilities. Evidently, they tend to be run and operated by poetry for the sake of poetry bourgeois types.
T.
September 1st, 2009 at 5:45 am
Come on, Tim! No defence? Just silence? Is that the new 21st Century definition of democracy’s cornerstone? SILENCE, IS THE CORNERSTONE OF DEMOCRACY! Sounds Orwellian.
T.
September 1st, 2009 at 9:21 am
Tod,
Tim is probably judging contest entries. Maybe we should not disturb him right now. What do you think?
In the meantime, I’ll pick up the banner (sort of). Although – - on some points – - I agree with you more than I agree with Tim.
You answered my prior question: “Where does that leave us?” But maybe I should have asked: “Where do we go from here?”
I think we would both agree that the state of modern poetry is pretty bad. And I somewhat agree that this is because Poetry’s Ruling Class (for want of a better label) sets the standard for what is “quality” poetry, and tends to promote their own work and that of their followers. However, where you decline to find any bright spots, I am able to point to several journals that offer excellent alternatives to the poetry that appears in the annual best american poetry anthology. (I read and agreed with your review of the 2007 best american poetry. Actually, I read both the book and your review quite awhile ago.)
I think it is significant that the only journal you mention favorably is one that does not publish poetry!
You’ve got some very good insight; however, I think your comdenation of the field is too broad. Although there is a lot to criticize, I still want to read good poems that are being written today. With a lot of searching, I am able to find them. Apparently you are not. So, again the question: “Where do we go from here?”
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:43 am
Well, if Time finds judging more challenging than being challenged, fine. We’ll leave him in his judgeship coccoon. Glad you agree on a few things here, C., and thanks much for checking out the review. I’ll have to do another one on 2009 when it comes out. See if it might differ (my review, that is) from the 2007 one. Well, I do find now and then poems that are not bad. Rather than “good,” I’d rather put it that way: “not bad.” And almost always what is missing from those “not bad” poems is the poet’s personal experience and especially engagement. Thanks for the “conversation” Cafais. T’es tu pas un brin franco?